Welcome to the Anything and Everything Jersey and Winchester abuse case blog.
Please scroll past these initial links to get to the main blog or the post you have come to read.
This is a statement from last summer:
Here is a link to the four great letters:
Here is a collection of Open Letters:
Here is my psychological report from last year:
This is my Daily Blog running from October 2011 until now:
These are other people's blogs on my case:
The blog itself is quite broken up, not written in an ordered fashion, a bit mixed up, like I am, talking about Jersey, the Diocese and my life.
Thank you for reading my blog, please persevere if it is at a bitty phase, go back and find what you are looking for in older posts, use the search button, or look at the favourite posts and links in the side bars.
The blog is heavy, I know, but the case is complex and the reality is that it has always been beyond me to get past the trauma and tell my story, so I am doing my best, in bits, to do so, as well as sharing related articles and links.
- I was abused in the Church of England as a vulnerable adult aged 19.
- I was abused by the husband of a vicar who was also my counsellor, this vicar took me home as a replacement for her stepdaughter who her husband, the girl's father, had abused and abandoned.
- I was further abused by another church officer.
- The church tried to close my complaints down, refused to deal with them and left both abusers and those who stood up for them in church positions.
- The church got me a criminal record for speaking up, they claimed I was harassing them.
- I had never been in police trouble before, but as a result, I lost my home and job, and was left on the streets, injured by the police and severely traumatized.
- Last year, years too late and the other side of me being destroyed, and while I was still homeless and destitute, the church launched on me in the National press, claiming to apologize.
- They also launched in the press, a 'report' into what had happened. This report was hideously inaccurate although it did show how members of church had abused process in not dealing with my complaint.
- The report, although not naming me, made it quite easy for me to be identified, I was one of very few autistic 33 year old women in the UK on the streets, and enough people who I met and was looked after by, knew who the report was about, and I lost friends and was shunned as a result.
- I also had strangers condemning and maligning me, it was heartbreaking.
- Then a church officer associated with my abuser, also in government, released my name and breached the data protection act.
- As a result of the Press reports and the report released, an all-out war broke out between the Diocese and Deanery involved, with me caught in the middle, I was slandered, I was smeared, I was condemned.
- The Church offered no help and I became ill as each new inaccurate report and cover up came out, each new damnation of me.
- New investigations were comissioned, and one was blatantly conflicted, to be carried out by a member of the group who supported the wrongdoers.
- I have been excluded from all reports, which, to save the church, are whitewashes which cover up the original admissions of wrongdoing.
- The church have treated me coldly, threatened me, despite them having me illegally traced by police, and have not helped me, instead they made illegal referrals of me to what they called help, without my consent and without checking it would help or what I wanted.
- I have pleaded with them to stop the harm to me, but to no avail, and I am living in fear, severely traumatized and knowing I cannot withstand the damning press reports and whitewashes forever.
Friday, 24 June 2016
In the Second World War, the tiny but spirited nation of ours fought with Great courage and remained free.
And then handed ourselves over, begging to be part of the German European Union.
Because we were being Excluded, and we didn't like it.
Having worked in the farming industry, I know what the European Union has done to us, taken real industry and strangled it and left us on subsidies that are not relevant to the industry but have become something that we depend upon.
Leaving the European Union will sadly not make Britain Great again, they have bled us dry and the UK is a roiling mess, and now with an uncertain future with regards Trade and movement.
I think the vote, narrow as it was, was to do with desparation. There could be no winners either way.
Great Britain, it's history and it's industry and it's pride, is a dry dusty and finished place, and I have no wish to be here, but where am I allowed to go now? Now that I am not in the European Union?
The thing about this referendum is the fighting over it has been so nasty and vicious that it makes me wonder if this world is even worth living in, let alone this country. I have never heard or seen such bigotry and hatred and narrowness, people attacking each other just because they are each exercising their own view, but they don't want others to have a view.
Well, anyway, my concluding truth is that I had no wish to be ruled over by uncaring and unelected people who are basically Germany. The EU already place penalties and regulations on the UK that they do not enforce in other countries. We are still paying for being the UK, for being the country that won the Second World War, and for Charles De Gaulle not liking us.
Great Britain does not have enough industry left to sustain it, we will have to copy the channel islands and have Great Britain Cows, UK Royal Potatoes, corruption and a massive finance industry! :)
The Second World War changed every country that it touched, and the EU has left it's mark on the UK, we will never be what we are, and we are now in a dangerous and unstable situation. I doubt very much that there is a contingency plan. Everyone was too busy attacking each other to think of that.
Thursday, 23 June 2016
Wednesday, 22 June 2016
I did a taped Statement about Jersey's safeguarding Partnership and letters to go with it, and it is all set up ready to send. Anyone who would like a copy of the taped statement, please ask. Although I am not well off, money isn't that important when my life is close to ending.
But in the meantime a much darker matter has come up.
Do you remember John Cameron, head of children's services at the NSPCC being illegally and inappropriately involved in my case on behalf of the Diocese of Winchester?
Refresh your memory here:
Anyway, I made a complaint to the NSPCC regarding this inappropriate abuse of power by John Cameron and the Diocese of Winchester, the 'referral' by the Diocese of a vulnerable adult to a children's service without consent was illegal and inappropriate. Cameron's acceptance of the referral and the Diocese's cover up to him and his unsolicited contact was equally inappropriate and illegal, he aided the Diocese in harassing me while they were harming me as described in the links below.
For three years the NSPCC have received my complaint and I have a file of automated replies to my emailed complaints, they have never responded to my complaint though.
A children's services director has no place in the case of a vulnerable adult unless something inappropriate is going on.
Now as you know, part of the onslaught against me in 2013 was Jersey Safeguarding Partnership doing a very swift whitewash of my case after Jane Fisher and Bishop Dakin liaised with Stewart Gull of Jersey Police, it was very strange and very frightening as the safeguarding board boasted to a member of the public that they had cleared the wrongdoers, while the police officer, Gull 'appointed' by the Bishop to illegally liaise with Dame Steel was also on the safeguarding board who did this swift whitewash and boast.
Did anyone factor John Cameron into this? Did anyone put two and two together about his position in the NSPCC and thus being a colleague of both Jane Fisher and the Jersey Safeguarding partnership and realise that this terrible corruption and conflict of interests could be even worse?
I had no idea, until yesterday.
Jersey Safeguarding Partnership have been threatening me with their whitewash report for three years now, while I have been under threat of the Church's whitewash reports, having already been destroyed by one of them.
If you need more information on the safeguarding partnership's terrorism of me, please read these:
I guess I never imagined that Cameron's violation of me was more than a one-off 'colleagues' back-scratching exercise between him and the disgraced former safeguarding director, Jane Fisher of the Winchester Diocese.
But gathering by what has happened, John Cameron did more than just violate me during the onslaught against me in October and November 2013, an account of which is available here:
Anyway, the NSPCC failed to respond to my complaint for three years, but after persisting in questioning them about what was claimed by the Diocese of Winchester about the NSPCC being able to house me, they finally replied to that query, and said they didn't house adults. Which I knew, but Bob Hill was duped into believeing that the NSPCC were going to house me, as you will have seen here:
The above link is not well presented but my mind was too distressed when I created it.
So anyway, on the tail end of the recent catastrophic press and media harm to me by the Church in the last few months, Jersey's safeguarding partnership start once again harassing me over their desire to publish their whitewash and further harm me. They have learned nothing and have ignored my persistent complaint and are determined to add to the public attack on my character in order to tick their boxes, despite damning reports recently on their own failures with children.
Their whitewash report on me has become a form of bullying, abuse and harassment that has contributed to the harm to me. What happens to the voiceless vulnerable? Especially when this is the way a 'serious case review' is carried out?! Shocking and unacceptable.
So what do you do when faced with something like this? Well you look for authorities who oversee such misconduct and harm, don't you?
Who oversees Jersey's safeguarding partnership? The conflicted council of ministers, most of whom are in the church!
Who else? Well I can keep putting my case to the home office, can't I? Theresa May is a Vicar's daughter.
Well I contacted as many social services and safeguarding boards in the country as I could, but I have been treated appallingly by social services who also were influenced by and acted for, the Church of England in my case, and have refused to protect me from harm by the church, and of course, being inextricably linked to the police, social services and safeguarding do not protect a victim of abuse of power by the church and police.
But I found that there is a government serious case review panel, so I sent them my complaint.
Unfortunately they meet only once a month.
So, I noticed that Peter Wanless was part of this panel, and I contacted him directly, despite the bad things I have heard about the NSPCC that he also is CEO of. This is because the serious case review panel meet only once a month and the safeguarding partnership are terrorizing me for their whitewash report here and now.
It's funny, the NSPCC have a very bad helpline and haven't responded to my complaint against John Cameron for three year. They are inaccessible and unhelpful, but Peter Wanless responded by telling me to phone the NSPCC helpline. No, not for a serious case review matter, as I told him, so I emailed him the details.
The next thing I knew, John Cameron was emailing me, and I was sick.
Peter Wanless handed this matter over to THE DIRECTOR OF CHILDREN'S SERVICES IN THE NSPCC, THE SAME MAN WHO HAD ACTED UNDER JANE FISHER'S INSTRUCTIONS THREE YEARS AGO AND HAD THREE YEARS OF UNANSWERED FORMAL COMPLAINTS AGAINST HIM!
My case is not a children's services matter, it is a case of a vulnerable adult being hounded towards death by whitewash reports and misleading press releases and being discredited and destroyed. Now this has been going on since six months before John Cameron was wheeled in as part of the cover-up. Why is a member of children's services in the NSPCC being repeatedly brought into this case?!
This is not an NSPCC matter, this is a serious case review matter, and something is seriously wrong when this man Cameron keeps popping up.
I got the impression yesterday that Cameron is a bit like a cover-up hitman, he is actually hired in to protect wrongdoers in safeguarding, but is really being a bit blatant in involvement in an adult case when he is a children's service manager, and I do object as it is too inappropriate and too blatant. As the complainant, I have a right to see him withdrawn from interfering, and an apology made. Because his re-involvement means it is being made quite clear that Jersey Safeguarding Partnership's behaviour will be upheld while I will be discredited and continue to be treated as mad and bad. After all, Cameron blatantly acted on behalf of the Diocese of Winchester in their nwrongdoing and had their side of things, he is conflicted. And if Peter Wanless didn't know that, he should know that, because his NSPCC have received three years of formal complaint and failed to respond, leaving Cameron to re-abuse me and presumably act in the interests of wrongdoers yet again.
Cameron's re-involvement shows Peter Wanless's and the NSPCC's contempt for my case in one way or another and that I remain at risk of this whitewash that Gleny's Johnstone boasted to a member of the public to 'clear wrongdoers' after this remarkably swift report was carried out without consulting me or including me, and I was contacted as an afterthought when the report was finished and because a Jersey deputy kept badgering the corrupt officer Stewart Gull about it.
Now, the question is, did Cameron actually arrange this whitewash with the safeguarding partnership? After all, he was working with Jane Fisher to harm and violate me and treat me as an object, Jane Fisher is known to have co-ordinated the tandem Steel and Safeguarding Partnership whitewashes with Officer Gull as the link between the two, did Cameron also abuse his power to oversee that uncannily swift discrediting of me in the form of the safeguarding partnership half of the whitewash?
Or was the fact that he remained unreprimanded to jeer by contacting me yesterday about the complaint sent to Peter Wanless in a serious case review capacity just a coincidence?
If it was, then it shouldn't have happened, because I have made a formal complaint against Cameron for three years.
Cameron has no right to conflict and jeapordize my complaint when he has acted on behalf of the people who have harmed me and is biased by their side, that he took in so well that he contacted me on their behalf while they were seriously harming me.
This is Jane Fisher who he acted for before:
What happens to the voiceless vulnerable?
So the situation is that I have been left sickened and incapacitated at a time when I need all my energy to ensure I do not end up as a long term rough sleeper after the recent destroying attack on me by the Church of England and the press.
Peter Wanless has some questions to answer, although judging by his response so far, he has no intention of either answering them or dealing with Jersey Safeguarding Partnership's wrong actions.
These are the questions:
- Why did the NSPCC leave John Cameron in a position to harm me again after his unethical actions on behalf of the defendants?
- Why has the NSPCC failed to respond to my complaint for three years?
- Why did you pass a complaint to YOU in YOUR CAPACITY on the serious case review to an NSPCC manager?
- Why was it passed to the head of children's services when this is a vulnerable adult serious case review?!
- Is it co-incidence that it was passed to someone who acts for the defendants and is prejudiced by that and now in a position to prevent justice and protection and allow harm to me?!
- Do you think it is acceptable that you allowed this man to terrorize and distress me when I am in a very vulnerable position when your transfer of my complaint from a government board to a charity is illegal?!
- Peter Wanless are you going to take my case seriously with Cameron influencing your view? Are you going to withdraw this matter from the NSPCC as it was submitted to your serious case review panel and are you going to deal with it fairly or deliberately fail to protect me and uphold the corruption and deceit of Jersey Safeguarding Partnership?
Monday, 20 June 2016
You are in my dreams this night
the snow and the salt and the sand
of St. Clements Bay where she died
Brother Can you hear me?
She is calling for help
but her cries are getting fainter
and the horror that was, still is
Brother can you wake?
Can you hear my screams?
through the salt and the snow and the dark
I can't bear it any more
Brother can you come up here
take her in your arms
make the darkness of St Clements bay turn to light
bring an end to the dark
Brother do you remember the dark
St. Clements, 2am in the morning
Time stopped then but she is waiting
when will the end come, when will there be peace?
Brother can you command her rest?
Take her from the sand and the salt and darkness
lay her to rest at St. Ouen
St. Clements Bay is frozen in the snow
Brother you were there when she died
frozen on the dark bay
the sand and the salt and the sea
so please take her to rest at St, Ouen
Brother where is she?
Dreaming of the sunlight
she is a child again, running to her father's arms with joy
the lights of Corbiere and Casquets beaming bright, home forever
Disclaimer. This poem is about unresolved grief and the horrific damage HG has suffered, it is also about platonic love and separation. It is not about suicide. The Church of England and their allies have and undoubtedly will again, try to have HG put away on any excuse to save their own skins, don't let a cry of grief be that excuse.
Friday, 17 June 2016
A bit outside of the scope of my blog but I thought this would be an exercise in writing to help try to bring me out of my stupor. The stupor is because the church and press and safeguarding board relaunched their attack and destroyed the tattered remains of my life.
Yesterday afternoon, or was it lunchtime. Sitting here in the stupor that the severe trauma of the latest onslaught by the Church, press and 'safeguarding partnership' have caused. I was on twitter.
Breaking news started that 'an MP had been shot'.
My image was of a gunman randomly firing into a crowd and just happening to hit an MP who was out and about in the town. I thought it might be a gang war type thing.
It wasn't very long before details began to emerge.
The MP, Jo Cox, had obviously been specifically targeted, and not only shot but also stabbed.
Someone else was injured, but not much has been said about that. But at the time, Jo had been rushed to hospital and was in critical condition.
The news told of scenes of panic as people tried to get away from the gunman, and how the gun was a makeshift gun.
How did this man get or make a makeshift gun? Well unfortunately it is possible to get weapons in the UK, I remember hiding behind a car with my brother when a madman with a crossbow went past when I was 14. That was life back then.
Anyway, I was kind of out of my stupor by then, Talking on twitter to other horrified people, including those who encouraged me to play on the swear machine, disrespectful? Maybe but maybe necessary, how can people come to terms with such horrifying news? I needed something to release pressure. So I played on the swearword generator with my pals.
What a horrifying thing to happen.
Jo Cox was on the news last year at the general election, with her reaction to being elected. I remember her trying to express her reaction to her election. She was so alive and happy.
The thing was with Jo Cox, and I don't mean this as a useless smear on some other MPs, she was actually qualified to represent people, she had a track record of public and voluntary service and she knew and understood human problems and suffering, she cared. It feels to me as if some MPs went to top boarding schools and have had everything handed to them on a plate and do not have the same experience that Jo did, they qualified as MP's by their social status not life experience. Jo lived in the very real world and used that in her work as an MP, for example in her speech on refugee children, she talked about how if those were her children suffering like that, she would do anything to get them out of that situation. Her work with the NSPCC and other charities meant she really knew about human problems and she really qualified as an MP because she could represent people and she continued her community work whilst also being an MP.
Jo Cox was attacked as she left an advice surgery that she was holding for her constituents. She didn't provoke an attack as someone suggested early on, and no-one can 'provoke' an attack in that way, because no one has a right to such violence. People say such stupid things about tragedies and injustice sometimes.
And of course the debate is in full spate now with stupid things being said all round.
Tragically Jo died within a few hours of the attack on her.
When that news broke, all I could think of was that someone had to go and tell her children, and that made me feel sick.
I may be autistic and with reactive attachment disorder and having only known hell in terms of family, but I care about human beings, I can't love them, I am close to being affectionless but I can care, and I do. And maybe I care more since the lesson of Bob Hill collapsing while trying to defend me. I have fought in spirit and prayer for Bob Hill's life for six months and the only good thing that has happened recently is that he has recovered enough to be safe home with his family.
Mothers are very important, children need them. What a lame thing to say, but it's true.
Jo Cox's husband was incredible in the statement he released, advocating fighting the hate and not taking part in it. It was a profound statement for someone who had just lost his wife to hatred. He and Jo obviously shared the same values, values that are vital in this world where selfishness is overwhelming. Jo and Brendan cared about people, and Jo became an MP because she cared. The world becomes more cold and with Jo's death, we can't afford to lose people like that.
One of the horrible arguments over Jo's death is that there were claims that the attacker shouted 'Britain First'. This has been used to start political fights. Firstly, why would the gunman shout that, while killing a British MP? Secondly, no one who murders a person has the interests of Britain at heart. Thirdly, someone deranged enough to kill doesn't represent anyone unless they are very sick.
And fourth, why use this alleged shouting by the gunman as politics? A woman is dead, a wife, a mother, someone who cared and represented the vulnerable.
Someone claimed that the arresting officers heard the gunman shouting this, but seeing as they arrived some time later and had to chase him, that is a bit silly.
Then the vicious fighting to do with this being to do with the European Union, and then it is used politically. A human being is dead, and the fighting and viciousness over the European Union so far has shown Britain at it's worst, people need to grow up a bit. And you simply can't be psychopathic enough to use a tragedy as ammo in a fight that has already gone into the sewers.
The other dreadful happening regarding the attacker and the press is the use of his 'mental illness'.
Now let me be realistic and non-controversial. There is no doubt that this man was mentally ill, anyone who kills in cold blood is either deranged, psychopathic, or evil and aware of what they are doing.
I do not know if the murder was pre-meditated. But I am sure the man was seriously mentally ill.
However, the misuse of the word 'mental illness' by the press and public without discrimination can be a slur on all people with mental illnesses. Mental illness covers a range of conditions from anxiety to psychopathy, and a vast majority of people with mental health problems wouldn't dream of committing violent acts.
So to use Mental illness as a reason for the murder without distinguishing between types of mental illness or actually name the illness. The press should be more responsible than to spread stigma.
I myself have been slurred and smeared as 'mentally ill' by the wrongdoers in my case, as an excuse for themselves, which is terrible and very damaging.
I hope that Jo's husband and children manage to cope and are well supported. My thoughts are with them. Jo's husband's statement regarding fighting the hatred was a brave statement from someone bereaved in such a way. I hope that the children are able to grow up feeling the same, because as well as such a public tragedy, the media attention will be overwhelming.
I have just read that a forensic psychologist claims that most people who attack politicians are mentally ill loners. It is terrible how deep this horrible attitude goes. I could be considered a loner because I can't cope with people and I prefer long hours of silence alone, the Jersey Deanery have tried to make me out to be mentally ill in the stigma and mad sense, and I suffer PTSD, but I don't attack politicians, I don't like violence. I don't like the church of england abusing their power and abusing me, but I have no intention of attacking them, just persisting in asking for justice.
Generalisations about mental illness are inappropriate in this day and age especially from people in authority, and such attitudes don't help and they make life harder for vulnerable people with mental health concerns.
Now the headline is that the killer had neo-nazi links. I will refrain from mentioning the Church of England at this point, I think people will speculate and argue and the press will have a field day, that is what happens.
A caring woman with a family who loved her is dead. That is the real headline and the real news, never mind argument or speculation.
Here is the statement and tribute by Jo's husband Brendan c/o The Independent Newspaper, if you haven't seen it yet, please do:
Tuesday, 14 June 2016
Monday, 13 June 2016
Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2016 16:34:11 +0100
Subject: SERIOUS FORMAL COMPLAINT OF ABUSE AGAINST JERSEY'S SAFEGUARDING BOARD, RISK TO A VULNERABLE LIFE AND WELLBEING